The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) is an international agricultural research center founded in the early 1970s to improve the understanding of national agricultural and food policies to promote the adoption of innovations in agricultural technology. Additionally, IFPRI was meant to shed more light on the role of agricultural and rural development in the broader development pathway of a country.[page needed][failed verification] The mission of IFPRI is to provide research-based policy solutions that sustainably reduce poverty and end hunger and malnutrition.IFPRI carries out food policy research and disseminates it through hundreds of publications, bulletins, conferences, and other initiatives. IFPRI was organized as a District of Columbia non-profit, non-stock corporation on March 5, 1975, and its first research bulletin was produced in February 1976. IFPRI has offices in several developing countries, including China, Ethiopia, and India, and has research staff working in many more countries around the world. Most of the research takes place in developing countries in Central America, South America, Africa, and Asia.IFPRI is part of a network of international research institutes funded in part by the CGIAR, which in turn is funded by governments, private businesses and foundations, and the World Bank.
As agrifood systems face mounting socio-ecological challenges, agroecology is increasingly viewed as a comprehensive approach to achieving sustainability. However, the public debate over whether this is the most suitable approach or whether it is viable at a large scale remains open. Examining how this debate unfolds is crucial as it can shape the future of agrifood systems. This paper contributes by conducting a systematic literature review to identify key perspectives and actors shaping the public debate around agroecology. Perspectives are framed around three narratives labeled "supportive," "skeptical," and "pragmatic." These narratives are articulated across sub-narratives in six highly debated areas: (1) initial transition costs, (2) input use and supply chain systems, (3) yield potential, (4) labor, (5) scalability, and (6) market access. The review also accounts for a broad group of actors participating in the debate from multiple - sometimes ambiguous and fluid - perspectives. The review shows that mobilizing the debate to enable agroecological transitions requires an integrative approach underscored by knowledge co-creation and collective learning. Based on insights from participatory approaches, we provide considerations for making these processes work and highlight areas that require further examination.
Context: The widespread and indiscriminate use of agrochemicals, coupled with unsustainable farming practices, has degraded soil health, polluted water resources, reduced biodiversity, and jeopardized environmental and human health in South Asia. Addressing these challenges requires climate-smart and sustainable nutrient management strategies that can enhance both crop productivity and agroecosystem services. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the trade-offs and synergies in agroecosystem services resulting from organic nutrient management using farmyard manure (FYM) and integrated nutrient management (INM), combining FYM with chemical fertilizers, compared to conventional chemical fertilizer practices across South Asian agri-food systems. Methods: A meta-analysis was conducted using 869 pair-wise observations extracted from 260 field-based studies conducted exclusively in South Asia. Studies were selected through systematic screening using the PRISMA protocol and classified by climate zone, soil type, and duration. The impact of FYM and INM treatments was assessed relative to chemical (NPK) fertilizer controls across five ecosystem services: crop yield, carbon sequestration, soil fertility, greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions, and water use. The natural log response ratio was used as the effect size metric. Results: The application of FYM alone resulted in a 4.71 % average reduction in crop yield compared to chemical fertilizers, but improved carbon sequestration (24.53 %), nutrient availability nitrogen (6.93 %), phosphorus (4.36 %), and potassium (2.49 %), and reduced water use (7.10 %). INM led to a 21.17 % increase in crop yield and significantly improved carbon sequestration and nutrient availability compared to chemical fertilizers. About 75 % of INM-related observations showed a synergistic improvement in yield and non-marketed ecosystem services, reflecting win-win outcomes. Conclusions: While FYM alone may not always match the yield performance of chemical fertilizers, it contributes to long-term soil health and water use efficiency. INM offers a balanced approach that enhances both productivity and environmental sustainability in diverse agro-climatic zones of South Asia. Implications: These findings highlight the potential of organic and integrated nutrient strategies as climate-smart solutions for enhancing agroecosystem services in South Asian agri-food systems. The study supports informed decision-making by farmers and policymakers to promote integrated nutrient use and reduce over-reliance on chemical inputs, contributing to more resilient and sustainable agricultural systems.
Agriculture is undergoing a new revolution. Technological advances allow drones to perform multiple tasks, including spraying crop protectants, spreading fertilizers, sowing seeds and surveying fields. Use of agricultural drones is growing extremely rapidly, particularly in Asia and Latin America, but has received little attention because it has happened so quickly. This revolution is significant because drones have the potential to enhance agricultural sustainability and reduce health risks by applying inputs more efficiently and safely than conventional methods. Drones also have the potential to raise agricultural productivity and farm incomes, overcome labor scarcity, and support rural livelihoods. But they create tradeoffs, including new environmental and social externalities, and dilemmas around technological sovereignty and data privacy. Prior academic literature on agricultural drones has been largely technical. We review prior literature and diverse non-academic secondary sources to track the extent and characteristics of global agricultural drone diffusion, providing estimates of numbers of agricultural drones in 10 major agricultural producer countries. We analyze drivers of drone diffusion, including technological innovation, falling costs, outsourcing services, and favorable policy environments, and explore emerging evidence of the impacts of drones on farm labor, agricultural efficiency, productivity, and profitability, and occupational health. The paper concludes by setting out an agenda for applied transdisciplinary research on the sustainability and food security impacts of agricultural drones.
Abstract Background Food environments in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are undergoing rapid transformation, particularly in urban and peri-urban settings. These shifts—characterized by changes in food retail landscapes, consumer purchasing behaviors, and the availability and affordability of nutritious foods—have significant implications for nutrition. Yet, the key characteristics of these environments, such as food desirability, convenience, accessibility, and marketing influences, remain underexplored. This systematic scoping review synthesizes evidence published between 2001 and 2023 across eight LMICs (Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Philippines, Kenya, Ghana, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Peru) to examine how urban and peri-urban food environments shape dietary behaviors and nutrition outcomes. Methods Guided by a conceptual framework encompassing nine key food environment dimensions—availability, prices, marketing and regulation, vendor and product properties, accessibility, affordability, desirability, convenience, and sustainability—we analyzed descriptive, associative, and intervention studies. We searched Scopus and Web of Science, identified 1,609 records, and included 251 studies in the review. Results As might be expected in a growing body of evidence, most research is descriptive, with limited causal or intervention-based evidence. Studies frequently focus on characteristics of informal vendors, sociocultural factors influencing shifts in dietary choice toward unhealthier options, and the proliferation of ultra-processed foods, especially near schools and in informal markets. Associations between food environment and nutrition outcomes, such as elevated BMI and overweight, are often linked to supermarket and fast-food access, though these relationships are frequently confounded by socioeconomic variables. Methodological inconsistencies in defining and measuring food environment dimensions limit cross-context comparability. Only seven intervention studies were identified, with few demonstrating significant improvements in diet or nutrition. Conclusions This review highlights critical evidence gaps in urban food environments in LMICs and underscores the need for standardized measurement and robust evaluations of diet-related interventions. Strengthening this evidence base is essential to inform food policy, urban planning, and public health strategies that promote healthier diets for populations in rapidly urbanizing settings.
This study explores how generative AI (GAI) tools for agricultural extension can be designed and evaluated more responsibly. While current GAI systems offer scalable, personalized advice, they often ignore the lived realities of smallholder farmers—especially women—by relying on generic datasets and rigid evaluation metrics. We investigate three complementary methods: adversarial testing to expose gendered and contextual blind spots in model outputs; deliberative stakeholder engagement using the C-H-A-T framework, which focused on Collective knowledge, Human insight, Augmentation, and Trust, to surface value tensions and design trade-offs; and field-level insights from extension officers to uncover trust-building, diagnostic reasoning, and social intelligence absent from static GAI interactions. Together, these approaches reveal that responsible GAI requires more than technical accuracy. It demands participatory design processes that foreground user realities, surface stakeholder assumptions, and account for social and institutional context. We recommend developing gender-responsive benchmarks, embedding reflexive, participatory design methods, and modeling advisory reasoning based on real-world extension practice. The findings contribute to a growing agenda for responsible AI development—highlighting the importance of aligning GAI tools not only with technical goals, but with the social, cultural, and political contexts in which they operate.
